1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit;

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 2010, the Plaintiff (formerly, Korea Special Group Co., Ltd.) imported 1,600 tons of single-tension machines (formerly, DIFENBACH production; hereinafter “instant machines”) for manufacturing automobile parts in KRW 883,464,068.

B. Around March 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a repair contract with the Defendant to remodel the instant machinery into a framework for military use to create a spath, a component of spath.

Since then, the Plaintiff moved the instant machinery to Cdong from among the Defendant’s factories located in 317, in the form of a documentary distribution of the documents in Haak-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, and had the Defendant repair the instant machinery.

C. Upon entering into the above repair contract, the Plaintiff lent KRW 200,000,000 to the Defendant on March 25, 2014, and KRW 18,400,00 on August 21, 2014, respectively, and the period of repayment is determined as “when completion of mechanical maintenance and repair work”.

On June 26, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement on the successful acceptance and development of research and development projects with Hansung Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Korean War") and 155 square meters long-term development projects.

On August 2014, Hanhwa was selected as a priority negotiation entity of the Ministry of National Defense's "155-Sari-Sari-Sari-Sari-Sari-Sari Project".

E. On December 24, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant: (a) around December 24, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant provided the evidence No. 8-1 and hereinafter referred to as “instant contract”).

(1) On April 1, 2014, the date of the drawing up was retrospectively drawn up. However, the payment of the said money was to substitute for the amount paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant for the interest accrued to the Plaintiff, etc. as stated in the foregoing C. Moreover, on December 31, 2014, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice for the repair cost of KRW 222,736,00 (the supply price of KRW 202,487,273, the tax amount of KRW 20,248,727,727) on the said contract by designating the Defendant as the supplier and the recipient of the Plaintiff as the supplier and the recipient of the Plaintiff.

Machines and Equipment Repair Work Contract

1. Contents of contract: 1600 tons maintenance work for oil pressure press facilities;

2. Contract amount: 22,736.